Architectural Photography Pricing

Very new to doing this sort of photography, although I've been fortunate in doing some work for some fairly large business in the area.

I've been doing a fair amount of homework on this topic and wanted to get your thoughts.

A couple of things...

1. How are you charging for your photography? hourly / daily/ 1/2 day.

2. Are you charging a creative fee/production fees/ usage fees?

3. Do those creative fees stay fixed?

4. How do you figure out what you usage fee will be?

5. Do you also add in a per image fee?

Lots of questions, but lets start with those. If you can answer just one, it would help.

Here is my current situation.

Just shot 24 images of interior and exterior of a major production company in DC. Images will be used for marketing from the leasing company. The production company will most certainly want a few if not all of those images too.

Time spent:

3 hr drive

1hr walkaround

3hr shoot

4hr post

The bill i'm sending them is going to be $1375 which at this point doesn't include any usage fees for third party.

I'm billing at $125hr

I don't really like this way of billing because a closer job location and fewer shots would be a lot less money in my pocket.

Thanks Michael. It sounds like you may be doing more RE shoots? I'm shooting space in large buildings generally. It seeem like every archictect photographer i've spoken (at least on the east coast) charges either an hrly or 1/2 day / full day rate.

I have a big job starting next spring for 150 projects by an large brick company. All shots are exteriors showing off their bricks obviously. the locations range from baltimore (where i live) to southern VA. These are 1 to 3 shots of exteriors and on to next location. Some locations are 3hr away so I will be staying a night and shooting there for two days and returning. I'll have to make this trip multiple times as there are at least 30+ projects in an around the richmond area that need photographying.

any thoughts on how you would tackle something like this, as far a travel expenses, and fees per building? This isn't your everyday photo request.

What is your website?

Thanks

Owen

I do interior photography for contractors and industrial architecture/interior for corporate real-estate. My site it Preferred Corporate Photographer in NYC | Event Photography | Corporate Headshots and team shots

First take on a job you know you can handle. Maybe just do the properties that are near by. A large project can turn into a very long project. There will always be something that will go wrong or unexpected delays from traffic to weather. Figure out a per building rate for 30 plus properties which includes up to 3 shots (example $400 per building at least, higher is always better) then figure out a travel rate which can be a 1/2 day rate plus expenses (motel and food).

$400 per building at 150 buildings?! That's $60.000. Unless one is a big name architecture photographer that's never going to happen. $400 sounds more like half a day, so $800 a day + expenses. If it's only 1- 3 exterior shots per building you could easily do 15-20 or so in one day for buildings in the same area. That's 10-13 days. Around $8000 + driving expenses would be more reasonable.

 

 

 

And a lot less time for you too. That's what you're charging them for after all, your time.

 

 

 

 

4 hours post-processing for 24 images? Shouldn't take much longer than 30-40 minutes.

$400 per building at 150 buildings?! That's $60.000. Unless one is a big name architecture photographer that's never going to happen. $400 sounds more like half a day, so $800 a day + expenses. If it's only 1- 3 exterior shots per building you could easily do 15-20 or so in one day for buildings in the same area. That's 10-13 days. Around $8000 + driving expenses would be more reasonable.

 

 

 

And a lot less time for you too. That's what you're charging them for after all, your time.

 

 

 

 

4 hours post-processing for 24 images? Shouldn't take much longer than 30-40 minutes.

I would say that post processing comes in many varieties. The art of handblending images (no hdr) can take some time and IMO ultimately gives you a better quality of work.

Unless we're talking about high end magazine style architecture shoots, shooting as well as processing interior and exteriors can be done fast and effective. I've shot thousands of homes and buildings over the years, all kinds of homes, mostly 360 pano virtual tours (which also include interior and exterior stills) for real estate. I also shoot just stills now, which typically takes 30 minutes per home (if the owners cleaned up) + another 30 minutes post-production for an average of 20-25 images per home. I don't work with lights, I bracket and batch process images into Photomatix for realistic HDR. After importing into Lightroom the HDR processed images have been further auto developed using presets for exposure, white balance and straightening/lens correction. After that I only have to crop (I shoot interiors mostly at 10mm and then crop to 4:3's to get rid of most of the distortions, this gives a realistically scaled looking interior shot and it also allows for very fast and precise framing and composing during post rather than messing around for that perfect edge to edge composition while on location. The most time is spent on the swapping of grey skies for blue skies in exterior shots on overcast days (though that's also fairly quickly done in ON1 Layers).

 

The point is that in order to be competitive (which includes fast turnaround times especially in real estate) you have to work as effective and streamlined as possible. Taking 4 hours to post-process 24 images is not effective and streamlined and therefore not competitive, regardless if you can actually charge for those 4 hours or not.

 

Outsourcing the post-processing is also an option. I've been looking at Photoup (there are several other companies online geared towards post-production for real estate and architecture photographers) to possibly outsource my processing if it gets to a point where I can't deliver on time anymore or when there's too much time spent post-processing taking time away from shooting assignments.

I’m not shooting real estate here. i’m working for companies that have big bank accounts. Not a RE agent. I’ve done that work and was lucky to make $50hr. Two different worlds here. The job that took me 11 hrs was worth $1400. It’s not uncommon in my world for the post to take as much time as the shoot. If your clients like the hdr look thats great, but there is clearly a difference when using luminosity masks and hand blending. Try not to judge or insult people when you don’t know the particular genre of photography. Shooting for an architect Or large commercial company and shooting for RE agent are very different. Pricing is all based on usage of image in my world

My architecture firm routinely hires professional photographers to document projects for marketing purposes. The rates are mostly based on a half-day or full-day rate, travel and expenses, and a charge per-image for processing of final, purchased images. Our photographers typically take many more images than we buy, but we pay a fair amount for the images we do buy. I am not at liberty to share rates, but that is likely a very regional, market-driven issue anyway.

As to HDR: That was a fad for a while, but it seems to have faded. The images we have in our archive that feature obvious HDR processing are now rarely used, since they feel dated and out of touch with how we want our designs to be perceived. Good luck and best wishes...

My architecture firm routinely hires professional photographers to document projects for marketing purposes. The rates are mostly based on a half-day or full-day rate, travel and expenses, and a charge per-image for processing of final, purchased images. Our photographers typically take many more images than we buy, but we pay a fair amount for the images we do buy. I am not at liberty to share rates, but that is likely a very regional, market-driven issue anyway.

 

As to HDR: That was a fad for a while, but it seems to have faded. The images we have in our archive that feature obvious HDR processing are now rarely used, since they feel dated and out of touch with how we want our designs to be perceived. Good luck and best wishes...

David

Very helpful. I’m guessing the photographer sends you the lot of unprocessed images, you choose which ones you want and pay per image like you stated. I think that makes sense as some images can take longer to put together and in the end, might not be used.

Hand blending is definitely a more refined way to blend images.

Thanks for your time.

O

You must think of HDR as being only oversaturated candy colored landscape or cityscapes. Like I said, HDR is simply a technique. The way I use it for interior and exterior shots is that you don't even know it's being used. It happens to be a very efficient and fast way to create clear and neutrally looking images that have all the details in shadows and highlights. I don't really care about its "reputation". I care about the results it can give me without unnecessarily spending significantly more time using other techniques that won't give me significantly better results.

You must think of HDR as being only oversaturated candy colored landscape or cityscapes. Like I said, HDR is simply a technique. The way I use it for interior and exterior shots is that you don't even know it's being used. It happens to be a very efficient and fast way to create clear and neutrally looking images that have all the details in shadows and highlights. I don't really care about its "reputation". I care about the results it can give me without unnecessarily spending significantly more time using other techniques that won't give me significantly better results.

beauty is in the eye of the beholder. if your clients like what you do, and obviously they do, then enough said. some like the hdr processed look and some like the look of luminosity blends.

I don't use HDR to create a look.

I think there was an early trend among architectural photographers who had shifted to digital to over-play their hand in PP. (Hey, look what I can do!) Overwrought HDR was one of the symptoms. HDR as a processing tool certainly has its place, but too much of even a good thing can be, simply, too much. An overdone HDR image is readily discernible as such, while a sensitively processed and presented image, by whatever technique, can be very beguiling. I think this is what Phil is getting at. It's not so much the technique one uses, but the result that technique renders that matters. It's kind of like makeup: The best applications are very effective, but invisible unless one looks specifically for them.

$400 per building at 150 buildings?! That's $60.000. Unless one is a big name architecture photographer that's never going to happen. $400 sounds more like half a day, so $800 a day + expenses. If it's only 1- 3 exterior shots per building you could easily do 15-20 or so in one day for buildings in the same area. That's 10-13 days. Around $8000 + driving expenses would be more reasonable.

 

 

 

And a lot less time for you too. That's what you're charging them for after all, your time.

 

 

 

 

4 hours post-processing for 24 images? Shouldn't take much longer than 30-40 minutes.

$400 dollars does not seem like a lot for a commercial building to me. I think you should charge for the value you deliver. You also need to cover overhead and marketing expenses. In fact.. I would say that a low fee of $400 would basically be some descriptive and documentary photos and nothing that requires too much creative effort.

Architectural photographers' rates vary based on many considerations, among which are their cost of doing business, their market (which could be local, regional, national or international), their level of experience and expertise, the production costs to shoot a particular project, their ability to negotiate and the photo usage terms their clients require. To try to find your level, the best you can usually do is try to find out what those whom you consider your closest competitors charge.

I typically charge a creative fee that takes my day rate into account but is not expressed to my client as a specific time-based rate. The creative fee will vary with the nature of the assignment and whether the creative fee accounts for the usage license. I may factor the photo usage/licensing into this creative fee or break it out as a separate fee. To this I will add the production costs specific to the assignment. Typical photo usage for architects and interior designers typically includes collateral and publicity usage, as well as submissions for design contests and editorial publication. However, actual usage of the photos by a design competition should only apply if your client wins, and the usage should only be to promote the award itself unless you are charging an additional fee for broader usage; and the photographer should typically be paid for editorial publication, for which the base commission fee may or may not account. Paid placement (advertising) is usually an additional charge that is negotiated separately. The usage may or may not be time and territory limited, depending upon what the client needs and is willing to pay for. Typically, third party usage and transfer of the usage license are not permitted without additional compensation for the photographer and require the photographer's written permission.

Owen, as an architectural photographer serving the Washington DC region I can assure you are low balling the market with a number such as $1,300 that's easily $1,500 to $2,500 below what other photographers are charging for the type of work you are describing. You have not done your CODB to come up with that rate, even up in Baltimore cost of living is rather high.

I wouldn't listen to people like Phil S he refuses to do basic math or have any respect for our craft/services we provide.

400 per building at 150 buildings?! That's $60.000.

there are 365 days in a year, here in the mid-atlantic you could say 50% those won't be good for exterior. The going rate for a full time employed corporate photographer in the DC area is $70,000 plus (if you can find an opening) That includes health, retirement, and equipment. Being responsible as a independent business to produce images of 150 buildings around the region will be nothing less than a full time project plus you have all the responsibility of an independent business and it's expenses such as liability insurance, hotels, gas, etc. I know you did not do any viable math calculations with your low bid.

These pricing questions always boil down to one common denominator and that is the person asking the question doesn't take even the slightest effort to figure out there own Cost Of Doing Business. It's a simple mathematical equation might take you two hours tops if you want to be thorough. Instead of replying why don't you figure out your CODB and report back on that?

I'm a single guy living extremely modestly no kids, no vacations, rent is very cheap in a very poor part of town - I know for a fact you are way below the DC Baltimore CODB

It would be great if for everytime someone starts a pricing question thread they would specify their CODB number and how they came to that number so we could understand their question better or where it went astray.

CODB is not your price it's the absolute lowest you can charge

p.s. I've had a couple of prospects ask me to estimate big jobs and call me skeptical I feel that they think you'll reduce your costs in order to get the project or are afraid of big numbers. then when the project comes around it's scaled way down so now your proposal needs to follow suit. Somewhere between a game of Chicken and the classic "we have ten projects for you can you reduce the costs on the first one"

Just saying, what manufacture truly has and needs 150 separate buildings photographed in a single region?

Very new to doing this sort of photography, although I've been fortunate in doing some work for some fairly large business in the area.

I've been doing a fair amount of homework on this topic and wanted to get your thoughts.

 

A couple of things...

 

1. How are you charging for your photography? hourly / daily/ 1/2 day.

2. Are you charging a creative fee/production fees/ usage fees?

3. Do those creative fees stay fixed?

4. How do you figure out what you usage fee will be?

5. Do you also add in a per image fee?

 

Lots of questions, but lets start with those. If you can answer just one, it would help.

 

Here is my current situation.

 

Just shot 24 images of interior and exterior of a major production company in DC. Images will be used for marketing from the leasing company. The production company will most certainly want a few if not all of those images too.

 

Time spent:

 

3 hr drive

1hr walkaround

3hr shoot

4hr post

 

The bill i'm sending them is going to be $1375 which at this point doesn't include any usage fees for third party.

I'm billing at $125hr

I don't really like this way of billing because a closer job location and fewer shots would be a lot less money in my pocket.

A couple of very good points have been made here.

Possibly the most important one is not to try to evaluate the price by what you think is expensive. Most of us think a $4.50 coffee is expensive .

Your client is a corporate entity. As such, you have (in theory) professionals accustomed to purchasing professional products with other people's money. They choose vendors to make them look good to their bosses.

Providing great work and advice on a job they may not have much expertise at is enormously valuable to them.

$60,000 for the job is perfectly reasonable for the reasons others have pointed out. Just as one hamburger maybe $6, ordering one for everybody in Baltimore gets expensive.

The issue here is not the individual price but rather the quantity the client is asking. In fact maybe they REALLY want all 150 buildings photographed. Or maybe not. You can find that out.

A couple of years ago my landlord asked me to photograph all his properties in our area. I looked at his shot list and gave him a quote of $17,000. I estimated it would take 4 days to shoot with x images delivered. Another friend was also asked to bid and he quoted $24,000. I got the job.

I was happy and so was he.

I bid jobs on a combination of time, travel, quantity of images desired, and usage. All jobs are different.

The worst is a day rate quote without any modifiers for quantity and usage. IOW Real Estate photography where prices are quoted by the house or square foot.

Even if you are a beginner you have to charge the right price. Doctors come in all types but they are all expensive.

Photography is also more of a soft service. No-one has ever needed that particular photographer compared to any plumber when in need of either one.

I'm sure you can provide examples of companies in the AEC business that are surviving and prospering without any visual marketing material on their website or in their print collateral?

If I want to fix my toilet I can hire a plumber or I can go to the hardware store, if someone wants a photographer to photograph their space: $3,000 camera, $2,500 lens (1), $5,000 in lights and grip, a vehicle to transport gear, insurance, $5,000 in computer, and software, years of learning software wether at a school or on photo forums/youtube/lynda.com, etc...

We provide a service and we should charge a fair wage.

not sure your point, can you provide examples of companies prospering that don't use visual marketing material in today's world as your post claimed?

you're the one trying to scare young photographers into thinking they should cut their price and be happy to get any offer available because photography has no value in the business world